| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Message-ID: <1303495578.2590.33.camel@mulgrave.site> Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2011 13:06:18 -0500 From: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com> To: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org> Cc: Jens Axboe <jaxboe@...ionio.com>, Steven Whitehouse <swhiteho@...hat.com>, "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: Strange block/scsi/workqueue issue On Fri, 2011-04-22 at 20:01 +0200, Tejun Heo wrote: > Hello, guys. > > On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 03:17:46PM -0500, James Bottomley wrote: > > On Wed, 2011-04-13 at 22:12 +0200, Jens Axboe wrote: > > > This patch looks pretty clean. Shouldn't you serialize that ->queuedata > > > = NULL assignment with the queue lock, though? > > > > pointer assignment is atomic, isn't it? As in on a 32 bit arch, it > > definitely is, and I thought on 64 bits it also was. So a simultaneous > > reader either sees previous value or NULL. > > What was the conclusion of this thread? James' fix seems minimal and > good for this cycle but I don't see it there yet. Jens, James? Sorry, forgot to cc you. I've proposed the minimal fixes for this cycle here: http://marc.info/?l=linux-scsi&m=130348665328233 http://marc.info/?l=linux-scsi&m=130348673628282 http://marc.info/?l=linux-scsi&m=130348680328356 And I'll merge at least the scsi one. But there's been no long term conclusion yet. James -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists